Slitherine

Not a scientific breakthrough, but it may be historical and add fun to the game and do damage to those pesky lights.

In the impact phase for shock troops fighting skirmishers.

If shock troops caused at least 2 hits and the skirmishers none and the skirmishers are disrupted or fragmented at the end of the impact phase the shock troops can choose to burst through them a variable move. If they variable move would not clear the skirmish BG the burst through does not happen. The skirmishers are left in place and reduced another level of cohesion. Any further impacts are fought immediately

(This bit is optional as it could mean reaching the enemy baggage in a single impact phase)

any further skirmishers met do not get a chance to evade.

Sounds a bit like a rule for one of those occasions that hardly every happens to me.

It will be fun when it does. And hardly ever happens? Lancers catch LH/LI up chuff, I think it happens a lot.

philqw78 wrote:It will be fun when it does. And hardly ever happens? Lancers catch LH/LI up chuff, I think it happens a lot.

Not when said LH/LI are in front of the baggage.........

If you are assuming this relates to an up the chuff situation then the lights are already disrupted, if the shock troops are lancers (most likely) and win by 2 then the lights will be taking a CT at -4 anyway so they will need to roll a 7+ to not break.

Is this 'rule' really needed?

How often have you managed to evade with lancers? To be honest that rule could be left out but I suspect it is only there because it was easier to not put in an exception.

hammy wrote:

philqw78 wrote:It will be fun when it does. And hardly ever happens? Lancers catch LH/LI up chuff, I think it happens a lot.

Not when said LH/LI are in front of the baggage.........

What has the camp got to do with it? If its not fortfied, and they reach it, they evade off table through it. If they don't make it shock might burst through them into it.

If you are assuming this relates to an up the chuff situation then the lights are already disrupted, if the shock troops are lancers (most likely) and win by 2 then the lights will be taking a CT at -4 anyway so they will need to roll a 7+ to not break.

And I if the skirmishers don't break! They may roll 11+ and stay disrupted. The opponent may be willing to sacrifice them and you may hit them frontally.

Is this 'rule' really needed?
How often have you managed to evade with lancers?

Hammy, what on earth are you talking about. I've never evaded with lancers, I have caught skirmishers with them though.

To be honest that rule could be left out but I suspect it is only there because it was easier to not put in an exception.

Are we talking about evading lancers or Breaking through here? If breaking through where?
I think you need to go back to bed Hammy.
How many armoured cavalry do Mongols have to have?

Phil,

I am talking about your breakthrough idea which in your initial post you wrote

(This bit is optional as it could mean reaching the enemy baggage in a single impact phase)

Why should lights have next to no chance at all of not breaking in one impact when they are hit in the rea?

Your idea would mean that a BG of skirmishers hit in the rear when evading and took 2 hits would only actually be able to survive the impact phase unbroken if it rolled 11+ on its CT!!! Most of the time evaders are caught they will take 2 hits. They will be auto disrupted by being caught and then if they roll anything less than 11 they will fragment. Now you are saying that should they not break they get burst through anyway, drop another cohesion so they break if they single dropped and fragment otherwise all automatically.

You are adding in an extra rule which I have to admit I thought from your baggage comment that you wanted to do to allow shock troops (read lancers) to get to the baggage quicker to cover a situation that is actually quite rare (hence my comment about no extra rule to stop fragmented lancers evading) and which will I think have a lot of nasty side effects.

Why is this rule needed? Surely taking down the poor little skirmisher unit in one impact and a pair of melee phases is actually nearly the same anyway in all cases apart from when the skirmishers are right in front of the camp anyway.

In short I think it is a silly idea that adds complexity for little if any gain. There are far more serious issues with the rules and the problem you have described is not IMO a problem at all.

hammy wrote:In short I think it is a silly idea that adds complexity for little if any gain. There are far more serious issues with the rules and the problem you have described is not IMO a problem at all.

I never said there was a problem. I never mentioned anything about lancers evading. I never mentioned the camp other than reaching it quickly hwich would be a bad thing.
Its a nice rule.

philqw78 wrote:Its a nice rule.

If you use lots of lancers........

philqw78 wrote:Not a scientific breakthrough, but it may be historical and add fun to the game and do damage to those pesky lights.

If "it may be historical", perhaps something historical to back it up would be in order?

nikgaukroger wrote:

philqw78 wrote:Not a scientific breakthrough, but it may be historical and add fun to the game and do damage to those pesky lights.

If "it may be historical", perhaps something historical to back it up would be in order?

I once burst through 2 paras front row and No8 in a rugby game. I was pretty shocked.

Were they between you and the bar? If so, no one here will be shocked... :)